Comments on Lueder Submission

[Mike Rawlins <rawlins@metronet.com>]

I am still catching up on reviewing original submissions.  Here are some comment's on
Kit's submission.

"Kit (Christopher) Lueder" wrote <snipped>:

>
> Requirements Issues:
>
>  - What is the scope and focus of this group?

The scope and focus of our project team is to define the requirements for the ebXML
work group effort.

>
>
>  - The extent to which specifications are provided for communications
> and enveloping, versus for just the document encoding. In other words,
> at what level is interoperability to be specified? Is ebXML going to
> standardize on the syntax of the XML document contents as well as the
> syntax of the document envelope?

Both requirements will be captured as different aspects of interoperability.  Your
question deals with scope, i.e., which requirements are we going to address within the
ebXML effort, and which will be addressed external to that effort.  I don't have any
immediate opinions on these two other than to offer that the appropriate project teams
are going to address the solutions.

>
>
>  - Compatibility with existing XML-EDI specifications, such as the
> Technical Report developed by ANSI ASC X12. For the June 1999 X12-XML
> draft, see: http://www.disa.org/x12/x12c/X12CTG3/PDF/xmltechreport.pdf

This gets into the issue of how much interoperability we want to support with existing
XML initiatives, including those based on traditional EDI standards.

>
>
>  - Extent to which security specifications are developed by ebXML,
> versus adopting some other XML general security solution (developed
> outside ebXML) or of communications security (e.g., S/MIME).

Again, we will capture the requirement.  It will be up to the appropriate project team
to recommend a solution.

--
Michael C. Rawlins, Rawlins EDI Consulting
http://www.metronet.com/~rawlins/